discuss: Documentation licensing


Previous by date: 8 Apr 2004 20:55:09 -0000 Re: Documentation Licensing, Emma Jane Hogbin
Next by date: 8 Apr 2004 20:55:09 -0000 Re: Documentation Licensing, Rick Moen
Previous in thread: 8 Apr 2004 20:55:09 -0000 Re: Documentation Licensing, Emma Jane Hogbin
Next in thread: 8 Apr 2004 20:55:09 -0000 Re: Documentation Licensing, Rick Moen

Subject: Re: Documentation Licensing
From: Rahul ####@####.####
Date: 8 Apr 2004 20:55:09 -0000
Message-Id: <20040408205507.5349.qmail@web8004.mail.in.yahoo.com>

 --- Emma Jane Hogbin ####@####.#### wrote: >
On Thu, Apr 08, 2004 at 08:31:32PM +0100, Rahul
> Sundaram wrote:
> > OK. Thanks. This clearly protects us from having
> > future problems.  shouldnt it be retroactive?. 
> 
> Absolutely not! At least not without the permission
> of every author whose
> document is going to be affected. Sooner or later
> (but probably later
> rather than sooner) old documents/out of
> date/unmaintained documents will 
> be removed from the collection for a variety of
> reasons. However, the LDP
> will *never* change a license or remove a document
> because of its license
> without written permission from the author (in the
> case of changing the
> license).

I didnt suggest otherwise. I said we shouldnt allow
arbitrary license and in cases where authors do not
meet the criteria of the manifesto, they should be
notified that they are in violation of it and
suggestions should be provided that they change the
license to something thats compatible

> > I also
> > suggest that the manifesto be modified to make it
> a
> > mandatory requirement that all documents should
> allow
> > modifications and we not allow gnu fdl with
> invariant
> > sections. it would also be convenient to allow
> > commercial redistribution
> 
> The LDP is not about convenience for commercial
> distribution. 

LDP reaches a wider set of audience if the documents
allow commerical redistribution. thats the goal of any
kind of project i suppose.



> Saying that a document
> should be /removed/ from the collection because it
> does not meet a
> specific license criteria is ridiculous!!! There are
> many valid reasons to
> remove a document from a collection, but this is not
> one of them. :(


I believe all documents in the collection should allow
modifications without prior permission. Instead of tbe
boilerplate and arbitrary licenses it would be better
to choose a single well known license like the
creative commons one

regards
Rahul


________________________________________________________________________
Yahoo! India Matrimony: Find your partner online. http://yahoo.shaadi.com/india-matrimony/

Previous by date: 8 Apr 2004 20:55:09 -0000 Re: Documentation Licensing, Emma Jane Hogbin
Next by date: 8 Apr 2004 20:55:09 -0000 Re: Documentation Licensing, Rick Moen
Previous in thread: 8 Apr 2004 20:55:09 -0000 Re: Documentation Licensing, Emma Jane Hogbin
Next in thread: 8 Apr 2004 20:55:09 -0000 Re: Documentation Licensing, Rick Moen


  ©The Linux Documentation Project, 2014. Listserver maintained by dr Serge Victor on ibiblio.org servers. See current spam statz.